[wp-hackers] Sandbox in WP Core?

[Jess Planck]

A good semantic framework in core would be cool, but Sandbox really  
needs an upgrade. I just started a personal fork about a month ago  
because there are a few places where WordPress 2.7 has made some nice  
filters that replace some of the old Sandbox function ( post_class()  
for one ).

I guess is this a discussion about including a framework as the  
"advanced" default theme to show some theme-fu? The basic themes are  
"good enough" to help with some theme coding examples, but if you add  
a framework to that mix then wouldn't you have to add a theme that  
uses the framework? That would be three themes in the included download.

Basic Theme - simple semantic "just works"
Theme Framework - simple semantic with some funky framework only style  
tricks like sandbox_body_class and those sandbox widget mods.
Based on Theme Framework - example with more funkiness. Maybe Krubrick  
based on Sandbox? I think that was mentioned last year.

If not, including a theme framework would really not make sense to  
anyone new to WordPress. Also additional included themes may make some  
people here get a little hot under the collar.

The only other logical solution would be to replace the Basic Theme  
with a framework and go from there, but that kills the "Just Works"  
and might be introducing advanced concepts too soon. Jeez this gets a  
little complicated.

Anyway... Here's the old ticket if it wasn't mentioned:

http://trac.wordpress.org/ticket/4517

Jess


On Feb 2, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Jennifer Hodgdon wrote:

> +1 for including a really good framework-type, black-and-white,  
> excellent-as-example, easy-to-modify theme in the WP distribution.  
> (Choose a good one. Modify it so it has all the best features of the  
> existing GPL sandbox themes. I like Sandbox personally.)
>
> Another idea: how about adding a tag to the Official Theme  
> Repository to mark themes as "frameworks" (I'm not sure if this is  
> the right term, but right now there isn't a tag related to this at  
> all)?